Rudd not keen on Canberra

I wonder what the reaction would be if the British Prime Minister refused to live at 10 Downing St and the American president refused to live in the White House

The lodge was created in an era before high speed communication and (relatively) low cost airline travel as a mainstay for the PM. With todays technology the PM can effectively govern the country from anywhere so whilst it holds a historical signficance its practicalilty is somewhat limited these days.

The problem appears to be with Lodge resident, Roger the Roo.

That’s it! I WILL not vote for anyone who won’t live in the Lodge – end of story. Forgetting of course, whether the leader in question is going to turn the tide of self-destruction that’s consuming the country.
But actually, in all seriousness, I do think it’s a little pussy not to move into an official residence when you’re elected prime minister. You’re running the country, for pete’s sake; who gives a rats whether your children will have to change schools or your cat and dog will have to shit elsewhere?

a little while back I heard there were plans to build a ‘new lodge’ for PM of the day down by the lake sort of in front of OPH – apparently the current lodge doesn’t really accommodate guests to standard and the dining room is far to small for entertaining.

…and the CT will headline:

‘Lodge rogerer ruts Rudd mutt’.

‘Shoo, Roo! Rudd mutt rogered at Lodge’.

I can see it now – front page Tele.

I still reckon his dog would get rogered by a large kangaroo…

what’s the big deal, this happens with loads of big wigs these days. both the head of my current department and the head of the government agency i worked before this don’t live in canberra and instead get flown in and housed at dept/taxpayer expense for a few days each working week.

Heaves I think it has to do with Canberra folk being (somewhat understandably) sensitive to ‘Canberra bashing’, and therefore looking at a PM who is prepared to live here as supportive of Canberra’s role as the nation’s capital.
Two thoughts on this:
Could you imagine the US Prez not living in the White House?
What would be the additional security costs of Rudd (and Howard for that matter) shunning the Lodge?
Not one of Rudd’s most considered responses I feel…

Why is it such an issue with the PM living in the Lodge? I’ve never really understood it myself.

mbleh – the only people who care about the PM living in Canberra, is Canberrans. The majority of Australia doesn’t really care.

If he serves to drive up house prices though, bring out the welcome mat.

Indeed, he neither confirmed nor denied that he would movew to the lodge.

Which in my opinion usually means no, he won’t.

But as I said, does it really matter in the long run? Sure, it would be nice, but there are a few more important issues to address.

rudd is a smmoth operator.

he’ss drip honey in your ear for a vote.

he has more verbal twists and turns than any other pollie bar beattie.

if he shook my hand id count my fingers afterwards.

And from Rudd’s own mouth on one of the news programs…

I guess that means it must be true to some degree.

and reported on the ABC knobnut.

Well gosh, if it was in the Daily Telegraph it must be true.

Pillocks.

This of course assumes Ruddy wins.

Has anyone asked Costello where he’d want to reside, in the event that the man of steel hands over the reins?

So the dog and cat are more important to a potential leader of our nation than the people’s wishes – I’m sure anyone in private industry offered the pay and extra perks the PM’s job brings would compromise on a move to Canberra to gain the other. Let him live in BrisVegas (capital of the state that they say the election will be won or lost in, I note…), but reduce the cost of maintaining/yearly rent for The Lodge out of his pay, plus any associated extra travel from Banana Country to Canberra.

Don’t forget he has young kids as well Thumper, best to keep them in their school (the true believers will also say).